1887
Volume 18, Issue 6
  • ISSN: 1569-4445
  • E-ISSN: 1873-0604

Abstract

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we propose an enhanced version of the multi‐gradient measurement technique, called full‐range gradient survey, for 2D electrical resistivity tomography. To demonstrate its effectiveness, we conducted numerical simulations and field experiments to highlight the advantages of the new data‐acquisition technique on the traditional electrode arrays and the original multi‐gradient measurement technique. A comparison of the imaging capabilities of the full‐range gradient technique with the dipole–dipole, Schlumberger and multi‐gradient shows that the former inherits all the advantages of the multi‐gradient technique as well as the sensitivity of the traditional three‐ and four‐electrode arrays. The new survey technique has a better pseudo‐section coverage, a much smaller geometrical factor, and less noise contamination than the dipole–dipole survey. It significantly improves the subsurface images of the Schlumberger and original multi‐gradient data. The numerical and field experiments both demonstrate that the full‐range gradient survey can be an alternative to all the traditional electrode arrays and original multi‐gradient surveys of 2D electrical resistivity tomography to obtain better quality and higher resolution images of near‐surface targets.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12125
2020-11-16
2020-12-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abdullah, F.M., Loke, M.H., Nawawi, M. and Abdullah, K. (2018) Assessing the reliability and performance of optimized and conventional resistivity arrays for shallow subsurface investigations. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 155, 237–245.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ahzegbobor, P.A. (2010) 2D and 3D geoelectrical resistivity imaging: Theory and field design. Scientific Research and Essays, 5(23), 3592–3605.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Ali, M., Sirat, M. and Small, J. (2008) Geophysical investigation of Al Jaww plain, eastern Abu Dhabi: Implications for structure and evolution of the frontal fold belts of Oman Mountains. GeoArabia, 13, 91–118.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Alsharhan, A.S., Rizk, Z.A., Nairn, A.E., Bakhit, D.W. and Al Hajari, S.A. (2001) Hydrogeology of an Arid Region: The Arabian Gulf and Adjoining Areas. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Chambers, J.E., Kuras, O., Meldrum, P.I., Ogilvy, R.D. and Hollands, J. (2006) Electrical resistivity tomography applied to geologic, hydrogeologic, and engineering investigations at a former waste‐disposal site. Geophysics, 71(6), B231–B239.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chirindja, F.J., Dahlin, T. and Juizo, D. (2017) Improving the groundwater‐well siting approach in consolidated rock in Nampula Province,Mozambique. Hydrogeology Journal, 25, 1423–1435.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dahlin, T. (1996) 2D resistivity surveying for environmental and engineering applications. First Break, 14, 275–283.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dahlin, T. and Zhou, B. (2004) A numerical comparison of 2D resistivity imaging with 10 electrode arrays. Geophysical Prospecting, 52, 379–398.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Dahlin, T. and Zhou, B. (2006) Multiple‐gradient array measurements for multichannel 2D resistivity imaging. Near Surface Geophysics, 4, 113–123.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. El‐Mahmoudi, A.S. (2007) The Application of two‐dimensional electrical resistivity imaging for mapping the quaternary aquifer at Wadi Muraykhat and Wadi Sa'a, Al Ain area, UAE. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 6(2), 13–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Ellis, R.G. and Oldenburg, D.W. (1994) The pole‐pole 3D‐resistivity inverse problem: A conjugate‐gradient approach. Geophysical Journal International, 119, 187–194.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fatma, A.A.S. (2002) Assessment of Groundwater Resources in Selected Areas of Al Ain in the U.A.E. Master Thesis. Abu Dhabi, UAE: United Arab Emirates University.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Greenhalgh, S.A., Zhou, B. and Green, A. (2006) Solutions, algorithms and inter‐relations for local minimization search geophysical inversion. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 3, 101–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hamzah, H., Yaacup, R., Samsudin, A.R. and Ayub, M.S. (2006) Electrical imaging of the groundwater aquifer at Banting, Selangor, Malaysia. Environmental Geology, 49, 1156–1162.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hojat, A., Arosio, D., Ivanov, V.I., Longoni, L., Papini, M., Scaioni, M., et al. (2019) Geoelectrical characterization and monitoring of slopes on a rainfall‐triggered landslide simulator. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 170, 103844.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Iqbal, J., Nazzal, Y., Howari, F., Xavier, C. and Yousef, A. (2018) Hydrochemical processes determining the groundwater quality for irrigation use in an arid environment: The case of Liwa Aquifer, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Groundwater for Sustainable Development, 7, 212–219.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. LaBrecque, D., Miletto, M., Daily, W., Ramirez, A. and Owen, E. (1996) The effects of ‘Occam’ inversion of resistivity tomography data. Geophysics, 61, 538–548.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Li, Y.G. and Oldenburg, D.W. (1992) Approximate inverse mapping in DC resistivity problems. Geophysical Journal International, 109, 343–362.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Loke, M.H. and Barker, R.D. (1996) Rapid least‐squares inversion of apparent resistivity pseodusections by a quasi‐Newton method. Geophysical Prospecting, 44, 131–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Loke, M.H., Chambers, J.E., Rucker, D.F., Kuras, O. and Wilkinson, P.B. (2013) Recent development in the direct‐current geoelectrical imaging method. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 95, 135–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Loke, M.H. and Dahlin, T. (2002) A comparison of the Gauss‐Newton and quasi‐Newton methods in resistivity imaging inversion. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 49, 149–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Loke, M.H., Wilkinson, P. and Chambers, J. (2010) Parallel computation of optimized arrays for 2‐D electrical imaging. Geophysical Journal International, 183, 1202–1315.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Loke, M.H., Wilkinson, P.B., Chambers, J.E. and Strutt, M. (2014) Optimized arrays for 2D crossborehole electrical tomography surveys. Geophysical Prospecting, 62, 172–189.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Loke, M.H., Wilkinson, P.B., Chambers, J.E., Uhlemann, S.S. and Sorensen, J.P.R. (2015) Optimized arrays for 2‐D resistivity survey lines with a large number of electrodes. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 112, 136–146.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Martorana, R., Fiandaca, G., Casas, A. and Cosentino, P.L. (2009) Comparative tests on different multi‐electrode arrays using models in near‐surface geophysics. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 6(1), 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Neyamadpour, A. (2018) Detection of subsurface cracking depth using electrical resistivity tomography: A case study in Masjed‐Soleiman, Iran. Construction and Building Materials, 191, 1103–1108.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Papadopoulos, N.G., Tsourlos, P., Tsokas, G.N. and Sarris, A. (2006) Two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional resistivity imaging in archaeological site investigation. Archaeological Prospecting, 13, 163–181.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Perrone, A., Lapenna, V. and Piscitelli, S. (2014) Electrical resistivity tomography technique for landslide investigation: A review. Earth‐Science Reviews, 135, 65–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Rizk, Z.S. and Alsharhan, A.S. (2003) Hydrogeology, groundwater chemistry and isotope hydrology of the Quaternary Liwa aquifer in the western region of the United Arab Emirate. Proceedings of sixth Gulf Water Conference, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
  30. Sasaki, Y. (1994) 3D resistivity inversion using the finite element method. Geophysics, 59, 1839–1848.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Smith, N.C. and Vozoff, K. (1984) Two‐dimensional DC resistivity inversion for dipole‐dipole data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, GE‐22, 21–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Szalai, S., Szokoli, K., Prácser, E., Metwaly, M., Zubair, M. and Szarka, L.L. (2020) An alternative way in electrical resistivity prospection: The quasi‐null arrays. Geophysical Journal International, 220, 1463–1480.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Tresoldi, G., Arosio, D., Hojat, A., Longoni, L., Papini, M. and Zanzi, L. (2019) Long‐term hydrogeophysical monitoring of the internal condition of river levees. Engineering Geology, 259, 105–139.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Wilkinson, P.B., Loke, M.H., Meldrum, P.I., Chambers, J.E., Kuras, O., Gunn, D.A. and Ogilvy, R.D. (2012) Practical aspects of applied optimized survey design for electrical resistivity tomography. Geophysical Journal International, 189, 428–440.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhang, J., Mackie, R. and Madden, T. (1995) 3D resistivity forward modeling and inversion using conjugate gradients. Geophysics, 60, 1313–1325.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Zhe, J., Greenhalgh, S.A. and Marescot, L. (2007) Multi‐channel, full waveform and flexible electrode combination resistivity imaging system. Geophysics, 72, F57–F64.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Zhou, B. and Dahlin, T. (2003) Properties and effects of measurement errors on 2D resistivity imaging surveying. Near Surface Geophysics, 2, 105–117.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Zhou, B. and Greenhalgh, S.A. (1999) Explicit expressions and numerical calculations for the Fréchet and second derivatives in 2.5D Helmholtz equation inversion. Geophysical Prospecting, 47, 443–468.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhou, B., Greenhalgh, M. and Greenhalgh, S.A. (2009) 2.5‐D/3‐D resistivity modelling in anisotropic media using Gaussian quadrature grids. Geophysical Journal International, 176, 63–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Zubair, M., Prácser, E., Metwaly, M., Lemperger, I., Szarka, L., Israil, M. and Szalai, S., (2020) A comparative study of the imaging capability of quasi‐null and dipole–dipole electrode configurations over an elongated, dipping, semi‐infinite conducting body. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 175, 103969.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Zogala, B., Dubiel, R., Zuberek, W.M., Rusin‐Zogala, M. and Steininger, M. (2009) Geoelectrical investigation of oil contaminated soils in former underground fuel base: Borne Sulinowo, NW Poland. Environmental Geology, 58, 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12125
Loading
/content/journals/10.1002/nsg.12125
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Electrodes , Inversion , Resistivity and Tomography
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error